Looks like we are going to Tampa in 2012. Hugh Hewitt spent a lot of time last night complaining about the weather in Tampa in August, which would indeed be better in Salt Lake City, one of the other cities in the running until yesterday. One thing is for sure, while holding the convention in SLC would have been problematic for Romney, this is not true:
Mitt Romney is a Mormon and many think the GOP isn’t going to want to highlight Mormonism in Utah during the convention.
Come on – that presumes a Romney nomination – far from a done deal. There was a Salon blog post along the same lines that strikes as extraordinarily poor writing for an outlet like Salon. (We make no claim to be great writers here)
The other two sites in the running, after all, were Salt Lake City and Phoenix. Salt Lake City would have seemed risky for the GOP — Mitt Romney, after all, may well be their presidential nominee. And Romney, like many of the residents of Salt Lake, is Mormon. The church’s headquarters and holy places are all over downtown. Did Republicans really want to have thousands of reporters taking tours of Temple Square with young missionaries in between political speeches and writing about the quirkier elements of the church’s theology? (Romney, when he ran for president in 2008, kept a low profile when he went to Utah for the funeral of the church’s leader.) Besides that, Salt Lake is 80 percent white, which would actually mean the Republican convention might add diversity to the population.
But if you want to find a reason why the GOP rejected SLC, you might think about Bob Bennett. Why should the party reward a state that rejected one of its stalwarts? But there is more…
…Bennett Rejection Fall-out
But unless you were there you wouldn’t have noticed that when Bennett took the podium, he was given a rousing intro by Mitt Romney. There in the land of Mormons, where respect of the elders is elementary, Romney paid homage to the elder. And the crowd turned away from Bennett and from Romney.
Which is interesting because another 2012 possible, John Thune, defended Bennett. Which is interesting because…
…Thune was in the News
Not to mention, a distant possible Mitch Daniels got a little press too.
And I wonder if Whitman’s slip in California is part of the same mindset that nailed Bennett. If it is, its not too bright. Poisner is far more centrist, even liberal, than Whitman. He is running a campaign pretty far at odds with his record of governance.
So what about Kagan? Well, her nomination means there are no Protestants on the court. Do I care? Not really, but I think it is instructive. I think it is symptomatic of the same phenomena that makes Evangelicals seem like such a potent political force, but rarely effective. Most issues of Evangelical concern are based in the courts, you would think if we really cared, we’d be breeding justices.
Although leading protestant legal force Jay Sekulow is asking the right questions about the Kagan nomination. And his blogging counterpoint, Barry Lynn seems to agree – strange bedfellows indeed.
The National Day of Prayer discussion continues. I hate to say this, but I agree with Kathleen Parker’s thesis, even if her argument for it is garbage. The issue is not belief, but the perception that the government is endorsing some specific form, object, or understanding of prayer.
Thinking about where the Tea Party and the Religious Right part company. The former is fiscal, the later social – but the left cannot seem to tell them apart.
Which makes this extended piece on how, “The Left’s political zealotry increasingly resembles religious experience,” quite interesting. One of the primary thesis of this blog is that tying religion and political stances too tightly generally results in politics subsuming genuine spiritual experiences. It has happened on the left. We should guard against it on the Right or religion is gone completely.